$20,000 for 100 Node SAM License?

https://thwack.solarwinds.com/people/martian%20monster  wrote: I was working on setting up my Solarwinds lab environment to do some testing/experimenting and to have a lab environment first to apply updates and see if anything breaks.  I have access to some of the NFR software because I am a THWACK MVP but it did not include any SAM licensing so I figured I would reach out to sales and get a quote for a 100 node SAM license for the lab.  I got the quote back and my jaw dropped - $20,000 for 100 node SAM license for the lab but if I purchase now I can get 50% off by the end of the year...   at this point I am evaluating  the lab environment to see if I should set it up at all.  I need the SAM component but not for 20K initial then another 6K a year for maintenance.  Get your stuff together Solarwinds...

Hi Dave,

Thanks for bringing up this concern. Is the lab environment that you're setting up purely SAM as a standalone product or would it be combined with others such as NPM?

It would have NPM, NCM, and a few other modules.  We have lab setup - Cisco ACI, Servers, Exchange, etc and wanted something that is somewhat similar for testing/configurations/etc but that kind of pricing for a lab is really a bit crazy.

https://thwack.solarwinds.com/people/martian%20monster  wrote: It would have NPM, NCM, and a few other modules.  We have lab setup - Cisco ACI, Servers, Exchange, etc and wanted something that is somewhat similar for testing/configurations/etc but that kind of pricing for a lab is really a bit crazy.

In that case really you just need to scope out a SAM license to cover the ones that have applications that you'll be monitoring. How did you estimate out that you need a SAM100 node license?

The rest of my NFR licensing is 100 node so I was keeping it all the same.  At this point I told the sales person never mind I have other more important things I can drop $20K on.

https://thwack.solarwinds.com/people/martian%20monster  wrote: The rest of my NFR licensing is 100 node so I was keeping it all the same.  At this point I told the sales person never mind I have other more important things I can drop $20K on.

In general, node based licensing is more expensive due to the fact that under node based licensing, you aren't capped for component monitors (removing the need to micro manage your count) and the licensing includes scalability engines for SAM and other systems modules (removing the need to quote a lab license for an additional polling engine).

Because of that, you would need to modify your node count for SAM to accurately reflect how many nodes you actually want to monitor applications from. That probably will drop you down closer to a SAM25 depending on your needs.

I understand the idea of moving to node-based licensing but I think you are overestimating how many component monitors people are using. I have plenty of customers who only want to monitor 1-5 components per server. They could monitors hundreds of servers with an ALX license that was half the price of a new SAM node license.

We used to sell SAM AL700/1100/1500 licenses for medium businesses - now they baulk at the new node licensing. Even large enterprises are baulking at the price compared to the other modules. Since the licensing model change, we haven't sold a single new SAM license - only renewals of the old AL licenses.

Last week we were discussing application monitoring with a client that had about 400 servers they were looking at monitoring. Based on a rough initial estimate they would have been fine on an old AL2500 or even AL1500 license as they mostly had a couple of services or processes to monitor per server and some would just have Asset Inventory turned on. Even if they wanted to add a few more AppInsights than planned, they could have bump up to an ALX license. They didn't require any additional polling engines (at this stage).

• AL1500 = AUD$30k
• AL2500 = AUD$42k
• ALX = AUD$48k

• SAM400 = AUD$82k

For equivalency, the SAM100 license is AUD$25k compared to the USD$20k you are quoted in the US - so my numbers will be slightly higher than the US pricing.

Under the new model, the SAM400 license is ~AUD$82k - this is almost double the previous ALX license. Even if they wanted to buy an additional polling engine, it would only cost them ~$28k, and it would be cheaper to buy ALX+APE than a SAM400. So now the client is looking at reducing their list to "high priority servers" but are now also looking at other tools. If they do find another tool, it is also highly likely they will look at that other tool/vendor for their NPM/NCM/NTA/IPAM equivalent.

I think SolarWinds are ballparking ~50 components per server on average when a lot of clients would probably have the average at < 10.

Simply put: I believe the new SAM pricing is absurd. There may be a need for the node-based licensing for those heavy component users but it's completely wiped out the low/medium tier of users. Yes, customers would run into the component monitor cap on the lower-mid tiers and they would need to micro manage it - but that was within their price point. The new licensing is now more expensive to start and very expensive at high server counts. BUT they can get APEs when they don't need them!

PS. It also costs a node license when you turn on Asset Inventory! You could get this across the board previously just by having SAM installed - potentially a closed loophole now in SolarWinds' eye though.

I wish i could upvote this post a million times. The new pricing of the node based SAM license does not make sense at all. I had a project last year with a customer with about 1500 servers. Easy with element based license... SAM ALX + 1 APE, customer had everything he needed for around 46k € Listprice....

Now...? Hell no he would purchased a license with a price of 130k €

I totally agree that a node based license makes sense for some customers, it is even way easier to explain to customers which are new to solarwinds and are used to a "node based" license model.

The free APEs (which are limited as a SAM polling engine) are not really a benefit.

Even if we take an example with a SAM1000 (node) license, which is about 100k€... With the element based license we could have 1 SAM ALX + 4 full APEs for the same price... so it would be capable of handling 40.000 to 50.000 elements... Thats alot.

And if the customer starts with SAM1000 and deployed a few of the "free" APEs...

He wants to purchase NPM later, with the node based license i now need to tell the customer if he wants to monitor his 30.000 interfaces he needs 2 "real" APEs (+ the NPM SLX license obviously)...?

That will be a fun discussion.

With the other example, 1 SAM ALX and 4 full APEs... i just can tell them get the NPM SLX and you are good to go!

Dont get me wrong, i love working with all of the Solarwinds-People and i really like the feature-set of the modules you provide, especially the SAM.

But if customers have to pay a lot more for exactly the same Software... thats rough to explain.

I would even agree that Standalone SAM installations makes sense with a node based license (but i still think they are too expensive), but as soon as an other license comes into play, the benefit of the free APEs is nearly zero. (If the new license would require one or more APEs)

Best Regards

Rene

Hi serena - Why can't we have both models for SAM licenses? (Where customer goes with the licensing model that is best for their need)

Is this something that SolarWinds would consider ?

Component based licensing for SAM which existed earlier and the new licensing model which is Node based licensing for SAM ?

Most larger companies follow this methodology Development -> Lab Testing, Integration -> Lab Testing -> Rollout to Production. Development is where you 'play', integration, mimics production, and then production.

Lab licenses are essential for this process to work.

Thank you for posting this, I guess we got lucky having our ALX in place already. We might be getting a deal, but we spend much less on that license than we would for 100 nodes and we have at least 800 or so that we would need to monitor.